New universities' record 'ignored' by access plans

New universities fear they will be forced by the government's new access watchdog to jump through hoops designed to broaden the intake at Oxbridge and elite institutions. They said today they would find it difficult to raise money for bursaries as Charles Clarke, the education secretary, is demanding.

From 2006, universities will be permitted to charge top-up fees of up to £3,000 a year if their admission arrangements are approved by the Office for Fair Access (Offa). Yesterday's document, launched by Mr Clarke, dealt almost exclusively with the problems he perceives at prestigious Russell group institutions and Oxbridge, which he said must shed its "Brideshead Revisted image". But there is resentment among the new universities that their track record in widening access to working class and ethnic minority students has been ignored or belittled.

Diana Green, vice-chancellor of Sheffield Hallam University, said Mr Clarke's proposals missed the basic barrier which discouraged working class young people from applying to older and more established universities - the fear of debt.

"The proposals imply that the reason these people do not apply to the 'top' universities is because they believe they won't be admitted. In fact, a major disincentive to participation generally is worry about finance and fear of debt - which doesn't figure in the government analysis at all," said Professor Green, who has been leading two Universities UK projects analysing the effects of student debt as a disincentive to prospective university applicants.

"Where there has been success in attracting students from these backgrounds, they have tended to study at local universities on cheaper courses. So, while the provision of bursaries may help, we're really dealing with a matter of culture and that is much harder to change."

Professor Green is also concerned that proposals which tie the right to raise fees to the level of bursaries provided will disadvantage some institutions.

"On the face of it, these proposals are focused on the top universities, but by applying them across the board it creates difficulties for universities like mine, where widening participation is not an issue.

"We recently attracted ten bursaries to mark our tenth anniversary, but it is extremely difficult to raise external finance and we do not have our own well-established bursary funds or the wide range of bursary donors that older universities have. Consequently, this could affect the level of fees we are allowed to charge and ultimately have a negative influence on our ability to deliver the quality we aim for."

Coventry University vice-chancellor, Michael Goldstein said the proposals were much clearer than previously described and should not be a problem for most universities.

"Certainly, Coventry University will have no difficulties whatsoever in satisfying Offa. Our track record is exemplary and must be the envy of other universities.

"Our primary concern is that there will be more paperwork and administration, just at the time when we are trying to reduce the overheads and put more resources into teaching and research. These proposals represent an additional bureaucratic burden we could well do without," added Dr Goldstein.

Geoffrey Copland, vice-chancellor of Westminster University and head of the Coalition of Modern Universities, said that new universities were already fulfilling the various criteria Offa will be judging them on. However, he said that there could be difficulties in providing bursaries to encourage participation.

"We do have a limited number of bursaries already - very limited because of our lack of endowment," he said.

"Part of the difficulty with the bursary scheme is that they are expected to be funded out of the additional fees. If half your students are already receiving benefits because they come from poorer backgrounds, we're not going to raise a lot of money to support others."